This invention relates to an integrated security and communications system. In particular, this invention relates to a security system integrated with a telephone system and/or an Internet connection, in which various communications features can be accessed from a keypad of the security system, and various security system features can be accessed from connected telephone sets.
Security systems for residential properties are well known. Such systems at one time were electrical or electromechanical in nature, but in more recent times have become electronic in nature, relying on microprocessors for controlling and carrying out their functions. Moreover, while it was common at one time for a residential security system to have external controls (e.g., key-operated switches) to activate and deactivate the system on exit and entry, which provided a point of attack for potential intruders, it is more common now for a microprocessor-based system to provide entry and exit delays, allowing all control interfaces to be within the protected perimeter of the premises. As a result, the first place a returning occupant goes upon entering the residence is to the nearest control interface for the security system, to disarm the system before expiration of the entry delay. Similarly, the last place a departing occupant goes upon leaving the premises is to the control interface, to arm the system.
Alternatively, or additionally, the user may have a transmitter, frequently provided in the form of a keyfob to be kept on the user's keyring, for arming and disarming the system. The transmitter may be a radio-frequency transmitter, in which case the user would not necessarily have to be within close proximity to any particular location on the premises, or may be an infrared transmitter, in which case the user would have to be in close proximity to, or at least substantially in the line of sight of, a receiver, which might conveniently be included as part of the control interface.
It also has become common for residences to be equipped with some sort of telephone answering device, which records a caller's incoming message, name, and or telephone number, for playback or review by the resident upon returning home. The answering machine or caller identification device also is one of the first places to which a resident goes on returning home.
Most recently, it also has become common for individuals to have electronic mail accounts for receiving messages via the Internet or other public data networks. Thus, a third place to which a returning resident goes is to a computer, to retrieve the electronic mail.
Security systems of the type being discussed almost universally communicate with a “central station” which monitors or supervises the status of each security system. Not only are alarms reported to the central station, which then acts on them or dispatches law enforcement to act on them, but even the absence of communication may be acted upon as a sign of possible trouble at the secured premises. In addition, a maintenance condition (such as a low back-up battery) can be detected and a service technician can be dispatched or the premises owner can be advised to correct the condition.
The communications between the local security system and the remote central station has traditionally been carried by landline or cellular telephone or by radio. Frequently, more than one of those media are used, for redundancy. Increasingly, many of the protected premises, including both homes and businesses, have high-speed connections to the Internet. Using such connections to communicate to the central station would be faster than the other methods described above. However, there are several problems associated with using the Internet for central station communications.
First, the inherent nature of the Internet gives rise to the risk of interception of, or eavesdropping on, messages sent on the Internet. This means that a secure encryption method is required.
Second, most Internet connections do not have fixed Internet Protocol (“IP”) addresses, meaning the central station cannot be sure, simply from looking at the originating address, that a message comes from a particular location. Because the central station must therefore accept messages from any IP address, and use other data in the message to identify the sender, the central station needs some other way to authenticate that the sender is who it appears to be.
Third, in most cases where the premises is served by an Internet connection, that connection is protected by a “firewall” to prevent unauthorized access to computers on the premises—e.g., by “hackers.” This makes it difficult, if not impossible, for a central station to poll the security system on the premises via the Internet, because the firewall prevents Internet access from the outside.
Fourth, the Internet has not yet reached a sufficiently mature state that it can be counted on to be available at all times. Service to a particular location may be “down” at unpredictable times.
Nevertheless, if a way could be found to use the Internet to communicate securely between a premises security system and a central station, and the system worked—i.e., the connection was not “down,” the Internet would clearly be the fastest communications channel, as compared to landline or cellular telephone, or radio.
Such a system would have multiple channels available to get messages to the central station. It would be necessary to use those various channels in the most efficient manner, avoiding unnecessary redundancy but also avoiding unnecessary delay in reporting to the central station.
It would be desirable to be able to minimize the number of electronic devices to which an individual must attend on returning or leaving the premises.
It also would be desirable to be able to improve the security of communications between the premises and an external data network.